Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives
Richard A Steenbergen wrote: They've definitely been improving it over the years though, so much that I almost never trigger a session reset on me unintentionally any more. They must have. This was new to me and came as a shock. I don't think I've ever seen my m120 behave any different than my cisco when it comes to flapping BGP. Things have just worked as I expected them to. Not that I go screwing with underlying interface configs or changing a peer from one group to another or changing the asn; at least not on a live session. These things would seem to indicate that the session might be subject to reset. Perhaps it just behaves for normal users and not power users. :) Jack
Re: Bandwidth Monitoring per AS
"Babak Pasdar" wrote on 11/16/2009 02:37:10 PM: > Could some of you share your recommendations on the best tools for > monitoring per AS communications. I would like to track all source > AS to Destination AS traffic utilization. Another netflow open-source solution is flow-tools/FlowViewer. Here you can track traffic to or from an individual, or combination of ASes, over time via RRDtool graphs. Other fine-tune filtering is available as well. http://ensight.eos.nasa.gov/FlowViewer Joe
Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 01:28:06AM +0100, Daniel Roesen wrote: > Caveat: no MAC accounting on LAGs (IEEE speak) / Aggregated Ethernet (Juniper > speak) / Etherchannels (Cisco speak). > > Might or might not be important when using bundled links to public > peering fabrics. Or for the very same goal, vendors can maybe think at making support for L2 primitives via NetFlow v9 exports somewhat more implemented. Cheers, Paolo
edgedirector.com
Any one got any comments about edgedirector.com's service(s), esp wrt to load balancing, geo-ip stuff etc. They seem to be way way cheaper than ultradns, esp when you adding in geo-ip load sharing and such. So is there wnay reason WHY its cheaper? -- Martin Hepworth Oxford, UK
Re: edgedirector.com
You really can't compare EdgeDirector's network to UltraDNS which is much larger and more resilient by leaps and bounds. I've spoke with the owner of ED before and decided against using the service. Right now we're using Afilias and the price isn't much worse, the GUI is much nicer, and the network is much larger and more redundant. We recently walked out on an UltraDNS contract due to deceptive billing practices. They're a corrupt company, imho. Jeff On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Martin Hepworth wrote: > Any one got any comments about edgedirector.com's service(s), esp wrt to > load balancing, geo-ip stuff etc. > > They seem to be way way cheaper than ultradns, esp when you adding in geo-ip > load sharing and such. So is there wnay reason WHY its cheaper? > > -- > Martin Hepworth > Oxford, UK > -- Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team jeffrey.l...@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net Black Lotus Communications of The IRC Company, Inc. Platinum sponsor of HostingCon 2010. Come to Austin, TX on July 19 - 21 to find out how to "protect your booty."
Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 09:24:24AM -0600, Jack Bates wrote: > Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > >They've definitely been improving it over the years though, so much that > >I almost never trigger a session reset on me unintentionally any more. > > They must have. This was new to me and came as a shock. I don't think > I've ever seen my m120 behave any different than my cisco when it comes > to flapping BGP. Things have just worked as I expected them to. Not that > I go screwing with underlying interface configs or changing a peer from > one group to another or changing the asn; at least not on a live > session. These things would seem to indicate that the session might be > subject to reset. > > Perhaps it just behaves for normal users and not power users. :) But those things won't trigger session resets on Cisco, so it often comes as a shock. Also, one might very well expect that changing the peer-as on a neighbor is going to cause a reset, but if you didn't know from experience you might not expect that renaming a group or changing an underlying interface MTU would do it too. The issue is that there is a fundamental design difference between Cisco and Juniper. Cisco lets you configure anything you want in a line by line basis, but it doesn't immediately apply those changes until you command it to do so. Juniper's philosophy is that you make a bunch of changes to a candiate configuration, "commit" to apply those changes, and then you can expect those changes to take effect (or at least begin trying to take effect) immediately. Personally I think the Juniper design philosophy is "better". Besides the obvious stuff like being able to rollback your config, think about how non-deterministic it is when you update a route-map but forget to soft clear the BGP session. The routes that have been exchanged so far will retain their old policy, while any new updates you receive after the route-map change will receive the new policy, leaving the session in an inconsistent state that will slowly and unpredictably change over time as routing updates come in. The trade-off is that you lose the ability to do non-impacting changes, where you make a change but know that it hasn't actually taken effect yet, and won't until the next time the session bounces. What Juniper is trying to do really is a good thing, I just wish it could tell me before I commit what is and isn't going to flap. :) -- Richard A Steenbergenhttp://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)
Bandwidth Monitoring per AS
Sure, Rick. Maybe they can buy ours off of us!! ;-) Regards, Mauricio Rodriguez Manager of IP/Data Engineering, FPL FiberNet Email: mauricio.rodrig...@fpl.com Office: 305-552-3418 Mobile: 786-236-2665 Pager: 786-236-2665
RE: Bandwidth Monitoring per AS
Apologies -- That was supposed to be addressed to Rick only... However, the truth is that we have outgrown our FCP. YMMV with the product... From: Rodriguez, Mauricio Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:08 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Bandwidth Monitoring per AS Sure, Rick. Maybe they can buy ours off of us!! ;-) Regards, Mauricio Rodriguez Manager of IP/Data Engineering, FPL FiberNet Email: mauricio.rodrig...@fpl.com Office: 305-552-3418 Mobile: 786-236-2665 Pager: 786-236-2665
Mauricio's FCP (was: Bandwidth Monitoring per AS)
> However, the truth is that we have outgrown our FCP. YMMV with the product... Why is that? What particular problems did you run into? -- Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team jeffrey.l...@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net Black Lotus Communications of The IRC Company, Inc. Platinum sponsor of HostingCon 2010. Come to Austin, TX on July 19 - 21 to find out how to "protect your booty."
What happened to Quick Eagle?
All, I have a Quick Eagle DL087E here, but Quick Eagle's website has fallen off the planet: p...@angel:~$ host -t any www.quickeagle.com Host www.quickeagle.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN) Can anyone help me out with a firmware update and/or PDF manuals? It's been a little while since I had to use one of these. Cheers Peter
RE: Mauricio's FCP (was: Bandwidth Monitoring per AS)
Since I've opened the can of worms... The FCP integration requires direct capturing of traffic off of your network. This would either be a off of a port mirror or off of network taps. We had some challenges, basically because of our architecture, implementing the solution at first. We had a rather collapsed network with service access and peering in the same router in some cases. Also, our routers were not capable of mirroring traffic at L2. Including any geographically diverse peering sites may be challenging. Options include another FCP, an FCR (remote packet capture device), or transporting the mirrored/tapped traffic back to the FCP location. I believe sampled flow data may have been an option, but was not a recommended approach. The preferred method of enabling communication between the FCP and peering routers for routing manipulation is to create GRE tunnels between those. Our routers did not support GRE as a base option or at all (multiple vendors/models). Other options are available that we did not explore fully. We have since "cleaned up" our architecture, but are also growing to a much larger number of ports and to 10Gbps. Also, we'd like to have more insight into traffic between our various service PoPs and not just at our transit/private peering edges. Significant hardware investment would be required to scale to this level. All that being said, the Internap Implementation team was very helpful and patient throughout. If you do go with this solution, you'll have a good set of allies at Internap helping you throughout the project. Regards, Mauricio Rodriguez Manager of IP/Data Engineering, FPL FiberNet Email: mauricio.rodrig...@fpl.com -Original Message- From: jeffrey.l...@gmail.com [mailto:jeffrey.l...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Lyon Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:33 PM To: Rodriguez, Mauricio Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Mauricio's FCP (was: Bandwidth Monitoring per AS) > However, the truth is that we have outgrown our FCP. YMMV with the product... Why is that? What particular problems did you run into? -- Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team jeffrey.l...@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net Black Lotus Communications of The IRC Company, Inc. Platinum sponsor of HostingCon 2010. Come to Austin, TX on July 19 - 21 to find out how to "protect your booty."
Re: What happened to Quick Eagle?
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 07:09:22PM +, Peter Hicks wrote: > I have a Quick Eagle DL087E here, but Quick Eagle's website has > fallen off the planet: > > p...@angel:~$ host -t any www.quickeagle.com > Host www.quickeagle.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN) Their phones go to a reorder too. I'm guessing the T1 DSU market is not as robust as it used to be. > Can anyone help me out with a firmware update and/or PDF manuals? While they did have an update mechanism, I don't remember ever really having to update the code on a DL08x. Once configured, they tended to just work. I did manage to find these: http://cliffbrooks.com/Samples/soloselectt1_qwk.pdf http://www.interlinkweb.com/quickeagle/manuals%5CPrelude-T1-Quick-Start-Guide.pdf (Your best bet is probably looking for DL087, followed by DL080 or "Digital Link" on Google, with the filetype:pdf modifier.) > It's been a little while since I had to use one of these. The menued interface is really easy to deal with, so just get consoled into it and go -- odds are you don't even need the docs. DIP switch guide used to be on a decal on the bottom -- if not, it's on page 19 of the first PDF I linked above. I used to have a very large quantity of these in service, so if you have any questions, fire me an email off-list and I'll see if I can remember the answer. --msa
APNIC to issue from 175 /8 and 182 /8 soon
Forwarding at the request of APNIC... From: Secretariat Reply-To: "secretar...@apnic.net" , Secretariat Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 23:31:42 -0500 To: APNIC-announce Subject: [Apnic-announce] APNIC to make allocations from 175/8 and 182/8 soon ___ APNIC to make allocations from 175/8 and 182/8 soon ___ Dear colleagues, In August 2009, APNIC received two IPv4 address blocks from IANA. These were: - 175/8 - 182/8 Reachability and routability testing is now complete and exceeds 96% for all prefixes. APNIC will soon be allocating from these prefixes. Please update your routing filters and network configurations accordingly. Please also double-check and release any blacklisted IP addresses from the above ranges, as they now represent fresh /8 blocks. Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please contact the APNIC helpdesk: helpd...@apnic.net Sincerely, -- APNIC Helpdeskhelpd...@apnic.net Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) Tel: +61 7 3858 3188 PO Box 2131 Milton, QLD 4064 AustraliaFax: +61 7 3858 3199 Level 1, 33 Park Road, Milton, QLDhttp://www.apnic.net * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary. ___ Apnic-announce mailing list apnic-annou...@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-announce
APNIC to issue from 175 /8 and 182 /8 soon
The following is a new meeting request: Subject: APNIC to issue from 175 /8 and 182 /8 soon Organizer: "Brian R. Watters" Time: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 11:00:00 AM - 12:00:00 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Invitees: "Leslie Nobile" ; "nanog" *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Forwarding at the request of APNIC... From: Secretariat Reply-To: "secretar...@apnic.net" , Secretariat Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 23:31:42 -0500 To: APNIC-announce Subject: [Apnic-announce] APNIC to make allocations from 175/8 and 182/8 soon ___ APNIC to make allocations from 175/8 and 182/8 soon ___ Dear colleagues, In August 2009, APNIC received two IPv4 address blocks from IANA. These were: - 175/8 - 182/8 Reachability and routability testing is now complete and exceeds 96% for all prefixes. APNIC will soon be allocating from these prefixes. Please update your routing filters and network configurations accordingly. Please also double-check and release any blacklisted IP addresses from the above ranges, as they now represent fresh /8 blocks. Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please contact the APNIC helpdesk: helpd...@apnic.net Sincerely, -- APNIC Helpdesk helpd...@apnic.net Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) Tel: +61 7 3858 3188 PO Box 2131 Milton, QLD 4064 Australia Fax: +61 7 3858 3199 Level 1, 33 Park Road, Milton, QLD http://www.apnic.net * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary. ___ Apnic-announce mailing list apnic-annou...@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-announce
Re: What happened to Quick Eagle?
The last time I drove by their office, it looked deserted - like they had closed down. Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications j...@via.net 650-207-0372 cell 650-213-1302 office 650-969-2124 fax On Nov 17, 2009, at 11:49 AM, Majdi S. Abbas wrote: On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 07:09:22PM +, Peter Hicks wrote: I have a Quick Eagle DL087E here, but Quick Eagle's website has fallen off the planet: p...@angel:~$ host -t any www.quickeagle.com Host www.quickeagle.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN) Their phones go to a reorder too. I'm guessing the T1 DSU market is not as robust as it used to be. Can anyone help me out with a firmware update and/or PDF manuals? While they did have an update mechanism, I don't remember ever really having to update the code on a DL08x. Once configured, they tended to just work. I did manage to find these: http://cliffbrooks.com/Samples/soloselectt1_qwk.pdf http://www.interlinkweb.com/quickeagle/manuals%5CPrelude-T1-Quick-Start-Guide.pdf (Your best bet is probably looking for DL087, followed by DL080 or "Digital Link" on Google, with the filetype:pdf modifier.) It's been a little while since I had to use one of these. The menued interface is really easy to deal with, so just get consoled into it and go -- odds are you don't even need the docs. DIP switch guide used to be on a decal on the bottom -- if not, it's on page 19 of the first PDF I linked above. I used to have a very large quantity of these in service, so if you have any questions, fire me an email off-list and I'll see if I can remember the answer. --msa
SBC/AT&T Contact
Is anybody experiencing any issues with customer traffic originating from either of these carriers? If anybody from SBC or AT&T can contact me off-list I would appreciate it. Thank you. --Stuart
RE: SBC/AT&T Contact
Not personally, but it's being documented here: http://www.internetpulse.net/ Frank -Original Message- From: Stuart Kirk [mailto:sk...@godaddy.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 10:25 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: SBC/AT&T Contact Is anybody experiencing any issues with customer traffic originating from either of these carriers? If anybody from SBC or AT&T can contact me off-list I would appreciate it. Thank you. --Stuart
Re: APNIC to issue from 175 /8 and 182 /8 soon
I'm available, but you didn't put a bridge number in. Best, -M< On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 8:50 PM, wrote: > The following is a new meeting request: > > Subject: APNIC to issue from 175 /8 and 182 /8 soon > Organizer: "Brian R. Watters" > > Time: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 11:00:00 AM - 12:00:00 PM GMT -08:00 > US/Canada Pacific > > Invitees: "Leslie Nobile" ; "nanog" > > *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* > > Forwarding at the request of APNIC... > > > From: Secretariat > Reply-To: "secretar...@apnic.net" , Secretariat < > apnic-no-re...@apnic.net> > Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 23:31:42 -0500 > To: APNIC-announce > Subject: [Apnic-announce] APNIC to make allocations from 175/8 and 182/8 > soon > > ___ > > APNIC to make allocations from 175/8 and 182/8 soon > ___ > > > Dear colleagues, > > In August 2009, APNIC received two IPv4 address blocks from IANA. These > were: > > - 175/8 > - 182/8 > > Reachability and routability testing is now complete and exceeds 96% for > all prefixes. > > APNIC will soon be allocating from these prefixes. > > Please update your routing filters and network configurations > accordingly. > > Please also double-check and release any blacklisted IP addresses from > the above ranges, as they now represent fresh /8 blocks. > > Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please > contact the APNIC helpdesk: > > helpd...@apnic.net > > Sincerely, > > -- > APNIC Helpdesk helpd...@apnic.net > Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) Tel: +61 7 3858 3188 > PO Box 2131 Milton, QLD 4064 Australia Fax: +61 7 3858 3199 > Level 1, 33 Park Road, Milton, QLD http://www.apnic.net > > * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary. > ___ > Apnic-announce mailing list > apnic-annou...@lists.apnic.net > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-announce > -- Martin Hannigan mar...@theicelandguy.com p: +16178216079 Power, Network, and Costs Consulting for Iceland Datacenters and Occupants
Re: SBC/AT&T Contact
I can confirm serious problems reaching at&t DSL customers. The majority seem to be in the Pacbell regions. Cheers, Aaron On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:28:17PM -0600, Frank Bulk wrote: > Not personally, but it's being documented here: > http://www.internetpulse.net/ > > Frank > > -Original Message- > From: Stuart Kirk [mailto:sk...@godaddy.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 10:25 PM > To: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: SBC/AT&T Contact > > Is anybody experiencing any issues with customer traffic originating > from either of these carriers? If anybody from SBC or AT&T can contact > me off-list I would appreciate it. Thank you. > > --Stuart > > > > -- Aaron Hughes aar...@bind.com +1-831-824-4161 Key fingerprint = AD 67 37 60 7D 73 C5 B7 33 18 3F 36 C3 1C C6 B8 http://www.bind.com/
Re: SBC/AT&T Contact
No issues out of Dallas area for what its worth. On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Aaron Hughes wrote: > I can confirm serious problems reaching at&t DSL customers. The majority seem > to be in the Pacbell regions. > > Cheers, > Aaron > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:28:17PM -0600, Frank Bulk wrote: >> Not personally, but it's being documented here: >> http://www.internetpulse.net/ >> >> Frank >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Stuart Kirk [mailto:sk...@godaddy.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 10:25 PM >> To: nanog@nanog.org >> Subject: SBC/AT&T Contact >> >> Is anybody experiencing any issues with customer traffic originating >> from either of these carriers? If anybody from SBC or AT&T can contact >> me off-list I would appreciate it. Thank you. >> >> --Stuart >> >> >> >> > > -- > > Aaron Hughes > aar...@bind.com > +1-831-824-4161 > Key fingerprint = AD 67 37 60 7D 73 C5 B7 33 18 3F 36 C3 1C C6 B8 > http://www.bind.com/ > > -- William McCall, CCIE #25044
Re: SBC/AT&T Contact
Stuart, ..Confirmed , packet loss , latency when connecting to several destinations from at&t, Orange County Uverse client. mehmet On Nov 17, 2009, at 9:07 PM, William McCall wrote: > No issues out of Dallas area for what its worth. > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Aaron Hughes wrote: >> I can confirm serious problems reaching at&t DSL customers. The majority >> seem to be in the Pacbell regions. >> >> Cheers, >> Aaron >> >> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:28:17PM -0600, Frank Bulk wrote: >>> Not personally, but it's being documented here: >>> http://www.internetpulse.net/ >>> >>> Frank >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Stuart Kirk [mailto:sk...@godaddy.com] >>> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 10:25 PM >>> To: nanog@nanog.org >>> Subject: SBC/AT&T Contact >>> >>> Is anybody experiencing any issues with customer traffic originating >>> from either of these carriers? If anybody from SBC or AT&T can contact >>> me off-list I would appreciate it. Thank you. >>> >>> --Stuart >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> Aaron Hughes >> aar...@bind.com >> +1-831-824-4161 >> Key fingerprint = AD 67 37 60 7D 73 C5 B7 33 18 3F 36 C3 1C C6 B8 >> http://www.bind.com/ >> >> > > > > -- > William McCall, CCIE #25044 >
